Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40598638›Full record

Trial reportBMC pharmacology & toxicology2025

Fosaprepitant for the prevention of multiple-day cisplatin chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting: a prospective randomized controlled study.

Lu Wang, Gaowa Jin, Wenjuan Wang, Jun Zhao, Feng Chen, Xiaorong Li, Ying Jiang, Zewei Zhang, Quanfu Li

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC pharmacology & toxicology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Olanzapine (10 mg vs 5 mg vs 2.5 mg) for the prophylaxis of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) - a systematic review and network meta-analysis.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2026
    Pooled it
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Lu Wang *Ordos Clinical College, Inner Mongolia Medical University, Ordos, 017000, China.
Gaowa Jin *Department of Medical Oncology, Ordos Central Hospital, 23th Yijinhuoluo Western Road, Ordos, 017000, China.
Wenjuan Wang *Department of Medical Oncology, Ordos Central Hospital, 23th Yijinhuoluo Western Road, Ordos, 017000, China.
Jun ZhaoDepartment of Medical Oncology, Ordos Central Hospital, 23th Yijinhuoluo Western Road, Ordos, 017000, China.
Feng ChenDepartment of Medical Oncology, Ordos Central Hospital, 23th Yijinhuoluo Western Road, Ordos, 017000, China.
Xiaorong LiDepartment of Medical Oncology, Ordos Central Hospital, 23th Yijinhuoluo Western Road, Ordos, 017000, China.
Ying JiangDepartment of Medical Oncology, Ordos Central Hospital, 23th Yijinhuoluo Western Road, Ordos, 017000, China.
Zewei Zhang *Department of Endoscopy, Sun Yat-sen University Cancer Center, State Key Laboratory of Oncology in South China, No. 651, Dongfeng East Road, Guangzhou, 510060, China. zhangzw@sysucc.org.cn.
Quanfu Li *Department of Medical Oncology, Ordos Central Hospital, 23th Yijinhuoluo Western Road, Ordos, 017000, China. 1729259137@qq.com.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeWe aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of fosaprepitant plus triple therapy versus triple therapy alone, in terms of both routine and delayed regimen, in preventing chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) in patients receiving three-day cisplatin-based treatment.

methodsIn a prospective randomized controlled trial, patients undergoing three-day cisplatin-based chemotherapy (25mg/m

resultsFosaprepitant plus triple therapy achieved a higher total protection (TP) rate during OP than triple therapy alone (56.9% vs. 40.4%; P = 0.018). Fosaprepitant plus triple therapy also produced a higher TP rate than triple therapy alone during delay phase (DP) (57.8% vs. 40.4%; P = 0.012) but not during acute phase (AP) (88.2% vs. 86.5%; P = 0.714). In addition, fosaprepitant plus triple therapy achieved higher complete response (CR) rates than triple therapy alone during DP, but not during AP. The delayed regimen appeared to have produced higher TP and CR rates than the routine regimen, but the differences were not statistically significant. The Kaplan-Meier curves showed that fosaprepitant plus triple therapy delayed the first vomiting.

conclusionsFosaprepitant plus triple therapy demonstrated superiority over triple therapy alone for CINV control in patients receiving three-day cisplatin-based treatment. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: This trial was registered in the China Clinical Trials Registry on December 8, 2020 (chiCTR2000040675).

Indexed as

AntiemeticsAntineoplastic AgentsCisplatinMorpholinesNauseaVomitingAdultAgedDrug Therapy, CombinationFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedOlanzapineProspective StudiesAntiemeticsAntineoplastic AgentsCisplatinfosaprepitantMorpholinesOlanzapineCINVFosaprepitantMultiple-day cisplatinOlanzapine

Identifiers

PMID40598638
PMCPMC12210530

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.